Ray v Southon

The appeal concerned an altercation between the appellant, Mr. Ray, and the respondent, Ms. Southon, who were in a domestic relationship. Mr. Ray pushed Ms. Southon, causing her to fall and strike her head on a coffee table. Mr. Ray contended that his actions were in self-defence. The primary judge rejected this defence and found Mr. Ray liable for assault. The appeal was heard by Ward P, Griffiths AJA, and Harrison J.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge erred in: (1) rejecting evidence concerning the nature of the parties' relationship as irrelevant to the issue of self-defence; (2) concluding that Mr. Ray did not act in self-defence; (3) finding that Mr. Ray had the "intent to cause injury" such that section 3B(1) of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW) did not apply; and (4) failing to provide sufficient reasons for the award of damages, particularly concerning the need for past and future domestic assistance, and whether a medical practitioner's opinion on this need was admissible.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the trial judge's reasoning. It held that the nature of the domestic relationship was not irrelevant to self-defence, but that the trial judge had properly considered it and ultimately found it did not support the claim of self-defence. The court affirmed the trial judge's conclusion that Mr. Ray had not acted in self-defence, noting that the evidence did not establish a reasonable apprehension of harm or a reasonable response. Furthermore, the court agreed that Mr. Ray's actions demonstrated an intent to cause injury, thus precluding the application of section 3B(1) of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW). Regarding damages, the court found the medical practitioner's evidence was properly admitted and that the trial judge had provided adequate reasons for the award of domestic assistance.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.